ArticleTuberkuloz ve toraks2024
Pre-procedure preparation, monitoring, premedication and sedation practices of bronchoscopists in Türkiye.
Article in Tuberkuloz ve toraks, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sedation is often required during flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB) to ensure patient comfort and the success of the procedure. The choice of sedative agents may differ between anesthesiologists and pulmonologists. This pilot study aimed to investigate the current pre-procedure preparation, monitoring, premedication and sedation practices for FFB in Türkiye, focusing on the preferences and practices of pulmonologists. Materials and Methods: A structured survey consisting of 30 questions was distributed to pulmonologists at various hospitals in Türkiye via Google Forms. A total of 97 responses were received, of which 80 were analyzed. Participants were divided into two groups based on their FFB experience: Group 1 with ≥10 years of experience and Group 2 with <10 years of experience. Result: The majority of pulmonologists ordered complete blood count, biochemistry, and coagulation tests before the procedure. The most preferred oral ingestion duration was 6-8 hours. Additionally, 98% of the physicians reported using at least one agent for premedication purposes. Routine topical local anesthetic use was high in both groups (88.3% and 85%, respectively). In addition, 40% of the physicians stated that they always applied sedation during FOB, and 48% stated that they applied sedation in certain situations, and that patient request was the most effective factor. Without the assistance of an anesthesiologist, pulmonologists preferred mono midazolam or a combination of midazolam and fentanyl for sedation. In Group I, two physicians reported using dexmedetomidine for combination sedation. It was also determined that propofol was not used in cases where an anesthesiologist was not available. Additionally, 47% of the physicians reported that they found current sedation practices completely adequate. Conclusions: Findings highlight the variability in sedation practices for FFB in Türkiye and underscore the need for standardized guidelines to optimize patient care and procedural outcomes. This study can be considered as a fundamental step towards more comprehensive studies by pulmonologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.